Featured Animals on Philip I coins, including SAECVLARES AVGG coins

When I started collecting, I had a few Philip I AR Antoninianus, months later I decided to focus on what I like themes, so I gave my Philip I to my little brother so he can start collecting. It didn't work, although he was interested at the beginning. this serie is very nice and interesting with a lot of history told on the coin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This coin isn't part of the SAECVLARES AVGG series -- in fact, it isn't even a Roman Imperial coin -- but it is a coin issued for a member of Philip I's family, with an animal reverse, so I thought I would post it here.

Philip II, Silvered billon Tetradrachm, 248-249 AD, Syria, Seleucis and Pieria, Antioch Mint. Obv. Laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust right, seen from behind, AYTOK K M IOΥΛI ΦIΛIΠΠOC CEB / Rev. Eagle standing facing, head right, wings spread, holding wreath in its beak, ΔHMAΡX EΞ OYCIAC YΠATO Δ [4th consulship]; ANTIOXIA / S C in two lines below eagle. Prieur [Syro-Phoenician Tetradrachms, by Michel and Karin Prieur (London, 2000)] 474, BMC Syria 560 (1899), McAlee [The Coins of Roman Antioch, by Richard McAlee (2007)] 1042, RPC VIII No. 29020 (https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/29020). 27.15 mm., 14.00 g. Ex. CNG Electronic Auction 466, April 22, 2020, part of Lot 728.





This is my first Roman Provincial tetradrachm. The seller bought it as part of a lot of seven provincial tetradrachms in a CNG auction last month, and then turned around and sold the pieces individually. I'm sure he made a nice profit, even though he didn't charge me that much for the one I bought. Interestingly, this coin (like the others in the lot) was described as "AR" by CNG, and by the seller to me, but all the catalogs, so far as I can tell, identify it either as billon (i.e., as less than 50% silver) or as "debased silver" (on RPC VIII online). In hand, it actually looks very much like a silver coin (more so than in my photos), which is why I describe it as "silvered billon."

 

Gallienus! Part of the zoo series.

 

My first post

A Philip I Antelope but with Officina IV instead of VI. I couldn't resist buying it..

 

I think I may have posted this on a similar thread long ago, but...

Philip I. 244-249 AD. Æ Sestertius (30mm, 17.75 gm, 12h). Commemorating the 1000th anniversary of Rome. Rome mint, 1st officina. 10th emission, 249 AD. Obv: Laur. draped, and cuirassed bust right. Rev: Elephant advancing l., led by mahout, holding staff and goad. RIC IV 167a; Banti 8.

 

Welcome. I'm not sure what number that is in the exergue of your coin. The IV in that series is the Otcacilia Severa hippo, written as IIII. The number on your coin looks sort of like an XIV, which makes no sense at all!

 

The Philip I elephant coin is actually not part of the 1000th anniversary series: it says AETERNITAS on the reverse, not SAECVLARES AVGG. (I have the antoninianus version, posted on the first page of this thread.)

 

Thanks, I could only find one other example that was for sale recently (
VAuctions > Lucernae Prima Auction Auction date: 2 June 2020
Lot number: 344) so I’ll classify it as an engraver’s error until proven otherwise

 

Welcome @michas48, an interesting coin, would like to see the obverse - Viminacium mint, engravers error?

 

According to CNG, it was. I think that is a reliable source. See:



CNG 102, Lot: 1076.

Philip I. AD 244-249. Æ Sestertius (30mm, 19.42 g, 12h). Commemorating the 1000th anniversary of Rome. Rome mint, 1st officina. 10th emission, AD 249. Laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust right / Elephant advancing left, led by mahout, holding staff and goad. RIC IV 167a; Banti 8. Near EF, brown surfaces with touches of green and red.

Continuing the tradition of Claudius and Antoninus Pius before him, the celebration of the Saecular Games at the end of every century since the founding of Rome culminated during the reign of Philip I, as the city celebrated her 1000th anniversary in AD 248. Types include the she-wolf suckling the twins Remus and Romulus, the various wild beasts paraded through the amphitheater, and a cippus inscribed for the preservation of the memory of these events.

 

CNG usually is reliable, of course, but I think they might be wrong in this case. If you have Sear's RCV III, he makes clear that the elephant antoninianus and sestertius are not part of the anniversary series; he numbers them separately from that series, and dates both at 247 AD (see RCV III 8921 for the antoninianus and RCV III 8989 for the sestertius). The anniversary series, by contrast was all issued in 248 AD, the year of the anniversary. More importantly, every single one of the anniversary series has SAECVLARES AVGG on the reverse, and the antoniniani all have officina numbers in the exergue -- whether issued in the name of Philip I, Otacilia Severa, or Philip II -- whereas both elephant coins have AETERNITAS AVGG as the reverse legend, and the elephant antoninianus (which I have) has no officina number in the exergue. Why would a coin be issued as part of the 1000th anniversary series, in connection with the Ludi Saeculares, without putting the SAECVLARES AVGG legend on it like all the others? Obviously it makes sense that an elephant would be one of the animals associated with the games, but why separate the elephant coins from all the others?

See this article in Coin World by David Vagi on the anniversary coins:

https://www.coinworld.com/news/precious-metals/coins-games-mark-roman-millennium.html

Coins with animal designs mark Roman millennium
By David Vagi

Published: Aug 18, 2014,

"Interestingly, the Rome Mint’s coinage that showed these animals was produced in different workshops (officinae). Each officina was allocated one animal, and each marked its work by placing a Roman numeral (I, II, III, IIII, V or VI) beneath the ground line on the reverse. A lion was the subject for the first officina, the she-wolf and twins for the second, the European elk for the third, the hippopotamus for the fourth, the stag for the fifth, and the antelope for the sixth.

The elephant is not included in this arrangement, as it has a different inscription, AETERNITAS AVGG, and it seems to belong to a separate series. The elephant is shown with a driver seated upon its neck, and it may have been more closely devoted to the emperor and his family than to Rome’s thousandth anniversary. It was an ideal creature for this inscription since it was renowned for its long memory."

I'd certainly like to know CNG's source for its contrary assumption.

 

Vagi is a bit inconsistent in that article, in that he also wrote there-in:
"The main draw for the millennial coinage, however, is not the inscriptions, but the animals used as designs: a lion, stag, antelope, European elk, hippopotamus, elephant and she-wolf."
Note: "The main draw......is not the inscriptions, but the animals...."
Some dealers, big and small, site the elephant issue as part of the Ludi Saeculares. Some do not.
The article is clear that he is speculating in this area...."seems to belong..."
This is not unusual, in that the history of coinage contains much speculation.

 

I think any conclusion on this subject involves speculation! As a practical matter it doesn't make much difference to me, since I keep my elephant with the other animals anyway.

 

I should add that RIC IV-3 also categorizes Philip I's elephant coins separately from the SAECVLARES AVGG coins, grouping them instead with other "undated" coins. (I don't know the source of Sear's dating of the elephant coins at 247 AD.) In any event, I think the burden is on CNG and other dealers who market the elephant coins as part of the anniversary Ludi Saeculares series to explain their justification for doing so, despite the completely different reverse legend and the absence of officina marks.

 

Nice coins!

Here's mine, of Philippus I Arabs.


Aeternitas Avgg could als refer to the imperial family. Or to the eternity of Rome, thereby also referring to the Saeculum. Or, why not both? In any case, I think that the fact that the reverse inscription is different than some of the other coins, alone is insufficient to conclude that it is not part of the coinage issued to celebrate Rome's 1000th anniversary. Though the difference of the legend is peculiar, yes, I would not exclude the theory that the 'Aeternitas' type is struck for a different purpose, either.

From one source found online (CNG, 436, lot 656): According to the Dr. Roger Bland's study on Philip I and family, "The elephant symbolizes eternity and the reverse legend applies it to the Imperial family. Elephants were probably brought in as part of the celebration for the Secular games."

 

That sounds like a reasonable explanation.

 

Sure - Here is the obverse along with the rest of the Philip animal family in my collection. The Philip II should arrive in next few days so am excited about it as completes the saecvlares series (for now - would love to have a hippo heads down as well). If anyone has a more plausible theory than engraver’s error I would be very pleased to learn that.

 

Welcome. A very interesting variant!

I have the typical example of the antelope, with VI in exergue.



Philip 1
AR Antoniniaus, 4.53g, 24.13 mm
Obv: IMP PHILIPPVS AVG; Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right.
Rev: SAECVLARES AVGG; Antelope standing left; VI in exergue.
Mint: Rome, 248 AD
References: RIC IV 21, RSC 189

 

Great thread Donna/ thanks for sharing your beauties. Also all other members great Philip I Commeratives. These are my favorite themes. Here is one I just won in Nomos Auction. Now I am off to work....
John

 

IU instead of UI for the Antelope left type RIC 21 is clearly just an engraver's error. I noted another such specimen in my copy of RIC: shown by Paul1888 on Forum in June 2011. C S instead of S C in exergue on Limes' Elephant sestertius above is a similar error.

Some twenty years ago I undertook a die study of the sestertii of the last three issues of Philip's reign, and was able to establish what in my opinion is beyond dispute their correct order.

Each issue included six reverse types, four for Philip I and one each for Philip II and Otacilia Severa. Each type was struck in about equal volume in the main denomination, that is in antoniniani.

The types of Issue 4a, the first stage of Issue 4, were for Philip I AETERNITAS AVGG Elephant, SAECVLVM NOVVM Temple, SAECVLARES AVGG Column, and FIDES EXERCITVS Four standards; for Philip II LIBERALITAS AVGG III Emperors seated; and for Otacilia PIETAS AVGVSTAE standing. These six types must have been introduced in January 248, since the only dated type of the preceding Issue 3 had just made it into 248 before ending and ceding to Issue 4: P M TR P V COS III P P Felicitas standing, a scarce and obviously short-lived type that was represented in the large Dorchester hoard by only five antoniniani.

The AETERNITAS AVGG Elephant type, then, was introduced in January 248, at the same time as SAECVLVM NOVVM Temple and SAECVLARES AVGG Column. Since these two companion types obviously referred in advance to the Saecular Games that were to be celebrated in spring or summer 248, it seems likely that the Elephant type too was chosen with reference to those upcoming Saecular Games.

In Issue 4b, only three new types were introduced, all for Philip I: FIDES EXERCITVS standing to replace his Four Standards type with the same legend, and FORTVNA REDVX seated and FELICITAS IMPP in wreath to replace AETERNITAS AVGG Elephant and SAECVLVM NOVVM Temple. The other three types of Issue 4a continued to be struck unchanged alongside the new types until the end of Issue 4: SAECVLARES Column for Philip I and the Liberalitas and Pietas types of Philip II and Otacilia respectively.

Two issues remain, whose composition is self-evident:

Issue 5 with reverse legend SAECVLARES AVGG, the well known animal reverse types, and a Latin numeral for each type, numerals I-II and V-VI for Philip I, III for Philip II, and IIII for Otacilia

Issue 6 carried on the numerals, but changed them to Greek letters, and introduced six new reverse types and legends: for Philip I TR P V Mars standing, TRANQVILLITAS AVGG standing, VIRTVS AVGG Emperors on horseback, and NOBILITAS AVGG standing, with letters A, B, E, and S respectively; for Philip II VIRTVS AVGG Mars advancing with letter Γ; and for Otacilia PIETAS AVGG sacrificing with letter Δ.

But what was the sequence of these final two issues? It seems likely that the Animal types, always with legend SAECVLARES AVGG, must have followed directly on Issue 4, which had already used that same legend with the COS III on column reverse type; and this supposition is proved beyond reasonable doubt by die links on the corresponding sestertii and by the shortening of the braid extending up the back of Otacilia's head, which proves that PIETAS AVGG Δ of Issue 6 must have been her latest reverse type: compare the shortened braid of RIC pl. 7.17 with the longer braid of her two earlier issues, RIC pl. 7.16 (Issue 5) and pl. 7.18 (Issue 4).

Thus a conclusion is reached that no one could have expected: Philip's Rome-mint coinage must have ended before he became TR P VI on 10 December 248 or 1 January 249, since the TR P V Mars type of his final issue (Issue 6) never advanced to TR P VI. I think the only likely explanation is that Philip I with his son and wife must have made an expedition to the East late in 248, perhaps to deal with usurpers; note the VIRTVS AVGG Emperors on horseback type of his Issue 6. While he was absent, before the end of 248, his successor Trajan Decius must have seized Rome and of course ended Philip's coinage from that mint. In 249 Philip was able to maintain himself in the East, while Decius ruled in Rome and the West, until Philip decided to march against the usurper and was defeated and slain by him in a battle at Beroea in Macedonia in c. September 249, shortly after his Alexandrian coinage registered the beginning of his seventh regnal year on 28 August 249.